Pages

Saturday, 11 February 2017

March 11 is an early indicator of 2019 polls (Sunday Guardian)

By M D Nalapat

If the ongoing Assembly results prove disappointing for the BJP, there will be a significant impact at the Central level.

After
having worked for decades to see the back of the British in India, it
was not expected of those in whose hands the country found itself that
they would so completely embrace the constructs left behind by the Raj.
Whether it be the Constitution of India, in which the influence of
British-era edicts is visible, or the eerily unchanged legal and
administrative framework of governance, there was a continuity that
mocked those who had expected a complete makeover once 15 August 1947
dawned. Seven decades on, it would be reasonable to wonder whether the
fealty to the British colonial model shown by India’s freedom fighters
was indeed the better course for this country to take, or whether there
needed to be changes designed to ensure a better representation of the
citizenry than occur in contests where the winner often secures less
than 20% of the total of voters. Given the need to ensure the election
of those not tied to narrow segments of the electorate, it may have been
better for the framers of the Constitution to have decreed a two-part
electoral process, with the first two contenders in the first round
battling against each other in the second, so that the winning candidate
represents a much bigger cross-section of the voters than may be the
case under the undiluted Westminster system adopted in India. In the
administration, rather than continue the Imperial Civil Service under a
new name, it may have been preferable to institute a more flexible
system in which accountability was high, much higher than now, when
hardly a few of those in the IAS get removed from service for
unsatisfactory service.

Indeed, if an examination were conducted of the
“confidential reports” of IAS officers, almost all of them would be
“outstanding”, the worst being merely “good”. It is a mystery as to why
India is still so much of a laggard, despite having such an
“outstanding” civil service, which seems most expert in inserting itself
into every high level crevice of government. The Indian Police Service
(IPS) is not far behind, having, for example, displaced the military
from leadership and control of the “paramilitary” formations set up
since the 1950s, and which should therefore get renamed as “para police”
formations.

Although Narendra Modi was expected to change several of
these practices and procedures, thus far the Prime Minister has moved
with caution, except on demonetisation, where on 8 November 2016 he took
a step that bears comparison only to the adoption by India of the
Soviet economic model by Jawaharlal Nehru in the 1950s. The election
results that will be out on 11 March will be a test of the political
impact of the demonetisation of Rs 1,000 and (old) Rs 500 notes, as this
is a measure that has affected every citizen. Should Modi be correct in
assuming the step to be a winner, his party would win in Uttarakhand,
Manipur, Goa and Uttar Pradesh and even narrowly in Punjab. However,
should the measure be viewed as toxic by the voter, the BJP may be far
short of a majority in UP, lose its majorities in Goa and Punjab, and
cede Manipur and Uttarakhand to the Congress Party. In the latter, Chief
Minister Harish Rawat has donned the robes of the “anti-incumbent”,
warning voters that a BJP victory would ensure the return of Vijay
Bahuguna as CM. In other words, the incumbent is seeking to cash in on
anti-incumbency sentiment, the archetypical “incumbent” being not the
present CM himself, but former Chief Minister Vijay Bahuguna, memories
of whose tenure as CM are still strong in the minds of Uttarakhand
voters. While caste, community and ideology still play a role in
deciding electoral fortunes, the 8 November 2016 withdrawal of 86% of
India’s currency is the issue that will decide the fate of the BJP in
either of two ways. Give the party a massive win, should the measure be
popular the way the BJP believes it to be. Or cause an electoral
disaster, the way even its former backer Nitish Kumar regards it as
being likely to. Importantly, the effects of demonetisation will
continue into the 2019 Lok Sabha election cycle, so the 11 March results
may be seen as a foretaste of what is in store less than three years
from now. Should Bihar CM Nitish Kumar be correct in his assessment that
the 8 November measure is a disaster, and the state Assembly election
results prove disappointing for the BJP, there will be a significant
impact at the Central level. For a start, opposition parties would be
emboldened to ensure that an anti-BJP individual be elected as the next
President of India. After its defeat, the BJP will find it difficult to
get more allies on its side, so as to ensure that the candidate chosen
by Prime Minister Modi gets sworn in as the next President of India.
Even BJP-friendly politicians such as Navin Patnaik of Orissa or Tamil
Nadu’s O. Panneerselvam may find it impossible to back the BJP candidate
rather than that of the rest of the opposition, following a 11 March
wipeout of the ruling party, should this be the consequence of the
anti-cash move announced by the Prime Minister three months back.

Narendra Modi has shed his business-friendly persona and
has metamorphosed into a scourge of the rich, publicly vowing to ensure
that the wealthy spend sleepless nights under his dispensation. Income
tax raids and arrests are likely to multiply. However, India in 2017 is
very different from 1972, as these days, what counts to the voter is a
change in circumstances. In other words, a well-paying job, should
employment not rise substantially, anti-rich rhetoric and gestures are
unlikely to reverse a mood of disillusionment. Prime Minister Modi needs
to be active in changing not simply the size and colour of a currency
note, but the very chemistry of governance in the country, a task that
would be made much more difficult by a setback in UP.

No comments:

Post a Comment

M D Nalapat's Latest Book

Click on image to buy

Search this blog

Share this blog

Follow by Email

About Prof. M. D. Nalapat

Prof. Madhav Das Nalapat (aka MD Nalapat or Monu Nalapat), holds the UNESCO Peace Chair and is Director of the Department of Geopolitics at Manipal Academy of Higher Education, India. The former Coordinating Editor of the Times of India, he writes extensively on security, policy and international affairs. Prof. Nalapat has no formal role in government, although he is said to influence policy at the highest levels. @MD_Nalapat

MD Nalapat's anthology 'Indutva' (1999)

In 1999, Har-Anand published Indutva an anthology of MD Nalapat's 1990s columns from the Times of India. The individual columns are posted here, in 1998 and 1999 of the blog archive, though the exact dates of publication are uncertain.